Royal Mail marks anniversary of Royal Yacht Britannia with commemorative sheet of stamps Royal Mail marks anniversary of Royal Yacht Britannia with commemorative sheet of stamps Royal Mail marks anniversary of Royal Yacht Britannia with commemorative sheet of stamps A new commemorative sheet of Royal Mail stamps marks 60th Anniversary of HMY Britannia 10 definitive sized Union Flag stamps celebrate the Royal Yacht’s launch by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II on 16 April 1953 each with labels featuring iconic images of the yacht The Royal Yacht carried The Queen and other dignitaries over 1,087,623 nautical miles between 1954 and 1997 Now permanently moored in Edinburgh, the ship attracts approximately 300,000 visitors every year The commemorative sheet will be available from , in main Post Offices and by phone on 08457 641 641 Royal Mail is releasing a special commemorative sheet of stamps to mark the 60th Anniversary of the launch of HMY Britannia.

The sheet of stamps will be issued on 16 April 2013, 60 years to the day since Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II launched the Royal Yacht from its Clydebank shipyard. It will feature ten 1st Class stamps featuring the Union Flag alongside striking images of the yacht from throughout its history. The images include the launch of the yacht itself, the Royal Apartments inside Britannia, The Queen’s 1977 visit to Fiji, The Queen and The Duke of Edinburgh in the Engine Room to celebrate the one-millionth mile travelled by the vessel and Britannia’s final overseas royal engagement in Hong Kong in 1997 alongside other iconic shots. Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia is the former Royal Yacht of Queen Elizabeth II and was the second Royal Yacht to bear the name. The ship was built by John Brown & Co. Ltd in Clydebank and the design was overseen by The Queen and Prince Philip. The ship was designed with three masts, a 133-foot (41 m) foremast, a 139-foot (42 m) mainmast, and a 119-foot (36 m) mizzenmast.

The top 20 feet (6.1 m) of the foremast and mainmast were hinged, to allow the ship to pass under bridges. It also had the capability to be converted into a hospital ship in time of war, although this function was never used. Commissioned for first duty at sea on 11 January 1954 and decommissioned on 11 December 1997, the Royal Yacht conveyed The Queen, members of the Royal Family, and various dignitaries on 223 visits to Commonwealth countries. In this time, HMY Britannia steamed 1,087,623 nautical miles (2,014,278 km). In 1997 the Royal Yacht carried the last governor of Hong Kong, Chris Patten and The Prince of Wales away after its handover to China. HMY Britannia is now a permanently moored visitor attraction in Edinburgh, and attracts approximately 300,000 visitors every year. The HMY Britannia Commemorative Sheet comes in a fully illustrated presentation folder that tells the story of the yacht.

Andrew Hammond, Royal Mail Stamps spokesperson, said: “HMY Britannia has played a hugely important part in the reign of Queen Elizabeth II and it’s only fitting that its anniversary should be marked with a set of Royal Mail commemorative stamps that will travel the world in the same way that the yacht did for so many years.” For further information contact: 1. Among HMY Britannia’s 11 Commanding Officers are nine Admirals 2. In 1986 HMY Britannia rescued more than 1,000 refugees fleeing the war in Yemen 3. In no place does HMY Britannia have her name displayed on the vessel itself 4. HMY Britannia had a secondary role where she could be converted into a hospital ship in times of war 5. The yacht is listed as part of the National Historic Fleet, Core Collection 6. HMY Britannia is one of the UK’s top evening events venues 7. HMY Britannia had two geared steam turbines, developing a total of 12,000 shaft horse power 8. In her day, HMY Britannia could travel at a speed of 22.5 knots maximum 21 knots continuous 9.

HMY Britannia was designed by Sir Victor Shepheard, Director of Naval Construction for the Royal Navy; and John Brown & Co. Ltd 10. On successful completion, she was commissioned into the Royal Navy on 11 January 1954 NOTES TO EDITORS The commemorative stamp sheet is for sale as a commemorative sheet only. Stamps and labels cannot be bought separately. The sheet costs £14.95. It is available in main Post Offices, online at and from Royal Mail Tallents House (tel. 08457 641 641), 21 South Gyle Crescent, Edinburgh, EH12 9PB. It is also available from . For almost 50 years Royal Mail’s Special Stamp programme has commemorated and celebrated events and anniversaries pertinent to UK heritage and life. Today, there are an estimated 2.5 million stamp collectors and gifters in the UK and millions worldwide. Her Majesty The Queen approves all UK stamp designs before they are printed.

Generic Sheet Technical Details: HMY Britannia Feature HMY Britannia : definition of HMY Britannia and synonyms of HMY Britannia (English) 8 External links Construction HMY Britannia was built at the shipyard of John Brown & Co. Ltd in Clydebank , West Dunbartonshire , UK, being launched by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II on 16 April 1953 and commissioned on 11 January 1954. The ship was designed with three masts, a 133-foot (41 m) foremast, a 139-foot (42 m) mainmast, and a 118-foot (36 m) mizzenmast. The top 20 feet (6.1 m) of the foremast and mainmast were hinged, to allow the ship to pass under bridges. Britannia was designed to be converted into a hospital ship in time of war, [1] [2] although this capability was never used. In the event of nuclear war it was intended that the Queen would take refuge aboard Britannia in the North West coast of Scotland [3] .

History Britannia sailed on her maiden voyage from Portsmouth to Grand Harbour , Malta , departing 14 April and arriving 22 April 1954. She carried Princess Anne and Prince Charles to Malta in order for them to meet the Queen and Prince Philip in Tobruk at the end of the royal couple's Commonwealth Tour. The Queen and Prince Philip embarked on Britannia for the first time in Tobruk on 1 May 1954. [4] On 20 July 1959, Britannia sailed the newly opened Saint Lawrence Seaway en route to Chicago, where she docked, making the Queen the first Canadian monarch to visit the city. U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower was aboard Britannia for part of this cruise; Presidents Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan also were later welcomed aboard the Yacht. Charles and Diana , the Prince and Princess of Wales, took their honeymoon cruise aboard Britannia in 1981. The ship also evacuated over 1,000 refugees from the civil war in Aden in 1986.

According to journalist Andrew Marr in his book The Real Elizabeth (2012), at least as of 1965, the British government planned for the Royal Yacht to serve as the Queen's refuge in the event of nuclear war . Peter Hennessy wrote, "It was her floating nuclear bunker... it would lurk in the sea lochs on the north-west coast of Scotland; the mountains would shield it from the Soviet radar and at night it would go quietly from one sea loch to another." During her career as Royal Yacht Britannia conveyed the Queen, other members of the Royal Family , and various dignitaries on 696 foreign visits and 272 visits in British waters. In this time Britannia steamed 1,087,623 nautical miles (2,014,278 km). [5] Replacement In 1997, John Major 's Conservative government committed itself to replacing the Royal Yacht if re-elected, while the Labour Party declined to disclose its plans for the vessel. Following Labour's victory on 1 May 1997 it was announced that the vessel would be retired and no replacement would be built.

The Conservative government argued that the cost of the vessel was justified by its role in foreign policy and promoting British interests abroad, particularly through conferences held by British Invisibles . When cancelling the replacement of the vessel, the new Labour government argued that the expenditure could not be justified given the other pressures on the defence budget (from which it would be funded and maintained). Proposals for the construction of a new royal yacht, perhaps financed through a loan or by the Sovereign's own funds, have since made little headway. The Royal Yacht's last foreign mission was to convey the last governor of Hong Kong , Chris Patten (now The Lord Patten of Barnes), and the Prince of Wales away from Hong Kong after its handover to the People's Republic of China on 1 July 1997. Britannia was decommissioned on 11 December 1997. Retirement There was some controversy over the siting of the ship, with some arguing that she would be better moored on the Clyde, where she was built, than in Edinburgh, with which the yacht had few links. However, her positioning in Leith coincided with a redevelopment of the harbour area, and the advent of Scottish devolution .

Her Majesty the Queen was reported to have wept at the decommissioning ceremony, [6] which she attended along with most of the senior members of the Royal Family. Listed as part of the National Historic Fleet, Core Collection , Britannia is now permanently moored as a five-star visitor attraction in the historic Port of Leith , Edinburgh, Scotland, and is cared for by the Royal Yacht Britannia Trust, a registered Scottish charity. [7] Entrance to the yacht is via the Ocean Terminal development, and over 250,000 people visit Britannia every year. She is also one of the UK's top evening events venues. On 18 May 2006, the Swiss-born Hollywood star and legendary first Bond girl , Ursula Andress , celebrated her 70th birthday on board the Royal Yacht. On 29 July 2011, a cocktail party was held on board the Britannia for Queen Elizabeth's granddaughter Zara Phillips and her husband Mike Tindall to celebrate their upcoming wedding; the yacht had been hired for the occasion.

[8] A retired Rolls-Royce Phantom V state car , owned by the royal family in the 1960s, is on display in the purpose-built garage aboard Britannia. Other highlights of the tour of the five decks that are open to the public include the Queen's Bedroom (behind a glass wall), and the State Dining Room. The Royal Deck Tea Room opened in 2009. The 1936 racing yacht Bloodhound , once owned by the Queen, is now berthed alongside Britannia. Bloodhound was one of the most successful ocean-racing yachts ever built and was also the yacht on which both the Prince of Wales and Princess Royal learned to sail. The Royal Yacht Britannia Trust bought Bloodhound in early 2010 and she is the centrepiece of an exhibition focusing on the Royal Family's passion for sailing. Visitors can view Bloodhound from a specially built pontoon when the racing yacht is in port.

Bow of HMY Britannia HMY Britannia at Ocean Terminal Leith Bridge HMY "Britannia" (Hansard, 10 December 1996) Lord Charteris of Amisfield My Lords, I have listened with the greatest interest to the noble Lord, Lord Ashbourne, and agree with much of what he says. I presume to take part in this debate because I have been fortunate enough to spend many weeks at sea in "Britannia", and have been able to experience at first hand the effect she has when she sails into any port in any part of the world wearing the Royal Standard. The Royal Yacht is, and has been for 42 years, a priceless asset for this country, principally because she adds an extraordinary dimension to visits by the Queen to foreign or Commonwealth countries, something which is not enjoyed by any other head of state. The effect of "Britannia" is electric. To understand the effect the yacht has, you need to be on board on a Sunday morning when "Britannia" passes through the Sydney Heads in Australia and sails up the harbour, trailing a thousand yachts behind her like a comet's tail.

You should be with her sailing into Philadelphia for what the Americans called their Bicentennial; or in Brazil, in Salvador and Rio; or sailing down the Elbe from Hamburg after the Queen's first triumphant visit to Germany in 1964. I cannot speak with authority of recent years, of course, because I was not there, but my friends in the Household—old-time colleagues—assure me that it was as it has always been in South Africa and St. Petersburg. The old magic never fails. Although "Britannia" was called a yacht for perfectly sound historical reasons, I think it was a pity that she was so called, because the name "yacht" gives a completely wrong impression. When you speak of a yacht nowadays, I think you conjure up pictures of hot, idle days in the Mediterranean, the popping of champagne corks, and illicit love affairs. I can assure you that that is simply not the form in HMY "Britannia". "Britannia" is a custom-built vessel designed to carry our Sovereign, who is also Queen of the Commonwealth, around the world as she does her business.

The ship has first-class communications and the ability to lay on impressive ceremonial, to provide dinner for 50 and a reception for 250, things which are essential for a state visit, and also, incidentally, extremely useful when you are visiting places like Papua New Guinea or the New Hebrides. And there is another thing. As the noble Lord, Lord Ashbourne, said, through the years "Britannia" has more and more been used for the promotion of trade, providing a place where British businessmen can meet their opposite numbers in whatever country the ship 1059 visits. I have not the slightest doubt that in this way "Britannia" has earned very many millions of pounds for Britain. I need hardly say that I hope very much indeed that Her Majesty's Government will decide to build a replacement. If by any chance those who are now on the Opposition Benches should come to power, I hope they will remember that "Britannia", that splendid national asset, was built by the Labour Government under Mr. Attlee, as Prime Minister. If the opportunity comes to them, I hope that they will do it again.

I hope that the Government themselves build a new yacht or ship without allowing Barclays Bank or anyone else to do it. The ship should be able to do what "Britannia" has done for so many years; and she should be manned by the Royal Navy and fly the White Ensign. § 10.20 p.m. Lord Strathcona and Mount Royal My Lords, this is a timely debate. As from next July a 330 year-old tradition will be broken. For the first time we shall not have a Royal Yacht either in existence or building. Let us not lose heart. If we make an early decision we could have a successor to the Royal Yacht appearing at Greenwich in the year 2000. But it does require an early decision. Unfortunately, we have the impression of governmental indecision. The Government have been accused of sitting on the fence. I sincerely hope that they have not sat on the fence so long that the iron has entered into their souls, as someone once said. I believe there is widespread public and commercial support for a successor. As already stated, the concept stands up to hard-nosed assessment of the benefits to both commerce and national prestige. It is not a royal plaything.

As my noble friend Lord Ashbourne said, the contribution of "Britannia" to our export performance is difficult to assess. It has been put at £2 million for an investment of £12 million a year, which surely justifies the support which the British Exporters Association gives to the idea. Furthermore, there are indication of generous gifts being available which might very well support something like half of the £80 million which is generally accepted as the ballpark figure for a suitable successor. But industry and the City are looking for a lead from government. Lest the Minister should say, "I am terribly sorry, it is a great idea, but we do not have any money", let me make the point, which I think my noble friend Lord Ashbourne has already made, that there is no need to find the upfront capital. This could be made into a bankable proposition if the Government were prepared to commit themselves to using the yacht, on a charter basis, for around 40 days a year. If that cost £2 million, £3 million, £4 million or £5 million, it should not be overlooked that £1 million would be saved in what might be called the alternative hotel costs.

There is also the other advantage, to which the noble Lord, Lord Elton, and others referred, of the sheer ambience that the yacht brings with it. Critical to reducing the cost of royal or government usage of the yacht is keeping her gainfully employed. At the moment "Britannia" spends around six months a year tied up alongside the wall in Portsmouth. That is no way to treat a valuable asset. In that regard, I pick up a point made by the noble Lord, Lord Amherst. It is here that the concept of the Royal Sail Training Ship impacts. I have been associated with that, although I hasten to add that I have no pecuniary interest to declare. This was an idea of Maldwin Drummond, who at the time was the Commodore of the Royal Yacht Squadron. Of course royal duties would always have to take precedence, but the Cadland concept is that one would have a university of the sail training world turning out 3,000 Queen's cadets a year, thus involving youth in the promotion of the country's interests and looking after our interests abroad. 1063 There would be other advantages.

The presence of a tall ship would capture public attention, the "green" idea of sails fits with the Rio conference of 1992, the nature of the work is character forming, and the sails offer stability and distinction from other super yachts. This is no tea-clipper dinosaur. I should like to refer to the technical capabilities of the boat but I am running out of time. I merely say that this is not a definitive proposal, but I hope it is an illustration of what might be done. I sincerely hope that the Minister will be able to tell us that the Government will look at all these suggestions before, for preference, Christmas; if not, we shall give them another chance by having a Royal Yacht stand at the Boat Show at Earl's Court in January. § 10.38 p.m. Lord Mottistone My Lords, I thank my noble friend Lord Ashbourne for introducing this debate and thank all noble Lords who have spoken. I strongly support the principle of having a Royal Yacht, roughly as described by my noble friend Lord Ashbourne. I shall not go into the varieties but on the whole I am against the sail training solution. We want something like the "Britannia" but a modern vessel.

I should not have thought it worth trying to preserve "Britannia" into the indefinite future. She is such an old ship now that there really is a need for something new. It is important that the country as a whole, and the Government and their officials in particular, not to mention the Navy, appreciate the importance of this vessel to a whole range of people who do not make themselves as well known as they could do. I was pleased to hear my noble friend Lord Ashbourne quote from the letters that he had received. What the vessel represents among other things is a demonstration of respect for Her Majesty the Queen. I very much fear that there has been a lot of thinking along the lines that, "We cannot afford to keep "Britannia" going for another couple of years until 2002 when the Queen will have been on the throne for 50 years and because the odd few million pounds have to be found" and not enough listening to the engineering department of the ship which says that it can keep it going much more efficiently than is credited by officials ashore. There is a great lack of respect for this vessel and for the monarch of this country.

There is a lack of respect for this country, what it stands for, what it has been and what it looks like if one is abroad. I have not been abroad very much recently, but when I do go I always find that people respect this country much more than the few characters who sit around in Whitehall and Westminster. It is sad. It is important that we have a vessel roughly like "Britannia", certainly for trading purposes. I agree that six months in the year is not really enough. I am sure that there are other things that can be done both for royal people as well as for trading. More importantly, we should have a vessel which provides a home and a base, as the noble Lord, Lord Charteris, described so eloquently. If only his contribution were more widely spread. I hope that all 1064 the newspapers will pick it up in a big way. We really need a home and a base for Her Majesty the Queen and other royal persons when they are officially going abroad. We need to respect their need for such a facility. I shall touch on two other matters.

Whatever size the vessel is in modern terms, it would need a much smaller ship's company which would be in the order of 120 or so people instead of 220. That would mean that out of the total strength of the Royal Navy and the Royal Marines of, I believe, around 40,000—they have been squeezed down and the figure may be lower—a ship's company of 120 people, most of whom are highly specialised for the task, would represent a tiny fraction of the charge on the Ministry of Defence. The other factor is that one has heard—and I suspect that some naval officers have taken it too much to heart—that people have said, "The Treasury will do you out of a frigate if you have the Royal Yacht because they will cost roughly the same to build and run". That is not true, but that is the kind of thing which is said. That is tragic. This is not the moment to comment on it except in passing. We have far too few frigates and destroyers to do the duties that we have cast on ourselves over many years, including the immediate present. Therefore, the Royal Navy is very sensitive to this question.

It is quite wrong that anybody should not see this vessel as a tribute to the Queen's authority, and as a vessel which can be provided for Her service; which represents Her Government's and people's respect for Her and which, when it is not doing those things, can be used to expand trade in the way that the noble Lord, Lord Charteris, said. We need to look at the matter from that point of view. During the past five or six years that I have been involved in this argument, I believe that the Government have behaved like a crowd of lily-livered ladies of ill-repute. § 10.45 p.m. Viscount Addison My Lords, I begin by declaring an interest as treasurer of the All-Party Royal Yacht Parliamentary Group. As a yachtmaster, one of the most important tasks that I perform prior to passage-making is passage planning, which includes: knowledge of past weather and weather predictions; poring over charts; plotting a course; negotiating hazards; consulting tide tables and tidal streams; considering time at sea and options to take in the event of severe weather; checks of equipment and safety equipment; the ability of the crew; and notification of the coastguard (the authorities) before embarking on the passage.

Fog must not cloud the issue. Careful planning in advance is of the essence. The option for "Britannia" and her replacement must be planned in much the same way. We are barely three years away from a new century and a new millennium. Yet we must move with the times. A successor to "Britannia" should be a modern solution and a forward-looking one—one that demonstrates British excellence, design and craftsmanship, shows that Britain is again a leader in building the finest ships in the world, reinvigorates our maritime heritage and enhances national pride. In short, this should be a Britannic project. 1065 Let us use this opportunity to promote British interests worldwide by building the Royal Family ships that set new standards in elegance and taste. As with the current Royal Yacht, these ships should be available to promote Britain throughout the world when not in use by the Royal Family. Both the British Exporters Association and British Invisibles are most keen to see a replacement and freely acknowledge the past benefit to British trade and industry from trade missions undertaken by "Britannia". But, as ships move slowly, distances are great and daily operating costs high.

When not in use by the Royal Family or British exporters, these new ships should also be made available to the world's most discerning travelers: world opinion formers, the best potential buyers of British products. I did say "ships". If we build two ships and base one in each of the eastern and western hemispheres we shall cut logistical costs, double the impact and produce key benefits for Britain. Our export industry will be able to carry out more overseas promotions in the most powerful of settings possible and at far lower cost. Our passenger shipbuilding industry will construct two of the finest ships in the world and re-establish its position in a market which has seen some 55 new ships ordered in the past three years alone. Leading shipbuilders are ready, willing and most certainly able. The revenue generated when not in Royal use means that the Royal Family can enjoy ships built to a higher standard than any other proposed solution, complete with helicopter pad and a specially-designed Royal tender for transport from ship to shore when at anchor. Naturally, the Royal apartments would be reserved exclusively for Royal use. I propose that the ships should fly the Red Ensign, giving a much-needed boost to our Merchant Navy and providing opportunities for training new generations of British seafarers.

There are precedents. For example, the Queen travelled around the world in 1952 on a merchant ship, "Gothic", and was accompanied by a rear admiral as flag officer. These ships would be entirely privately financed. British banks and other individuals and organisations are ready to provide the finance needed. Thus, there is no need for taxpayers' money for the construction, future necessary refits or refurbishment, or operating costs. The only public cost would arise in Royal use, and that is estimated to be no more than 15 per cent. of the current yacht's annual cost. The ships will be an immense source of pride for Britain and a showcase for British excellence. In short, let us plan for the future and not live in the past. I commend the Britannic project to the House. I urge the Government to give this proposal immediate consideration and support. § 10.49 p.m. The Earl of Balfour My Lords, like I am sure most people, I want to see another Royal Yacht to replace the present one. However, I believe that she must be powered by modern diesel engines, because that is by far the most economic method.

In fact, I suggest that she burns the kind of oil as is used in the commercial ships which sail around the world. 1066 Her Majesty's yacht "Britannia" was built in such a way as to be convertible into a hospital ship. That fact should be considered but, equally, she should be as flexible as possible in order to cover the important trade functions for which she will be needed. That too should definitely be borne in mind. It has been suggested that the yacht should be made into a sailing vessel. I speak from my own experience as a naval seaman on one of the last commercial sailing ships—I admit, way back in 1947—in saying that the cost of the sails, rigging and so forth make such ships totally uneconomic. This country's future lies in electronics, silicon chips and very sophisticated computer-ware. One of the great advantages of having a Royal Yacht is that such products can be displayed on board the ship, which will boost trade. That would be done almost on home base and would introduce the commercial side.

During the past 40 years all commercial ships have become bigger and therefore perhaps we should not rule out the idea of the replacement ship being bigger than the 5,000-tonne "Britannia". I hope that the Government will look sympathetically on the proposal. If they give it a boost I am sure that many of this country's important businesses will back it completely. § 10.52 p.m. The Earl of Effingham My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Ashbourne, for introducing this debate in your Lordships' Chamber. It is inconceivable that a replacement yacht should not be built. As a nation we excel at pomp, ceremony and showing the flag and "Britannia" has been a superb diplomat for Britain abroad. The impact as she enters harbour, dressed overall, is incredible and while overseas she is a wonderful flagship for tourism both outwards and into the UK. The yacht has been a unique and potent advertisement for Britain, particularly in its trade mission role. From this comes contacts and even contracts, and it has been quoted widely that some £500 million-worth of export deals are clinched every year on her decks.

A new ship, with strong commercial links, must be developed. Foreign statesmen and business leaders enjoy the ambience of being entertained on the yacht and as a symbol of Britain's prestige, surely it cannot be bettered. The yacht costs £21,000 a day, or £7.7 million a year, to run and her fate was sealed when it was announced that she needed a £ l 7 million refit which the Government, at the time, were not prepared to approve. Last year "Britannia", while representing a very secure base from where the monarch can fulfil her state functions, had Royal Family members on board for 22 days and spent a further 14 days on trade missions. But I am sure your Lordships are aware that she has to spend far greater time on passage, positioning herself worldwide to enable her to undertake these duties. I believe also that the yacht provides a unique capability of hydrographic and oceanographic support and research on the lesser used navigational routes. 1067 The Royal Yacht was not used in the Falklands because she was incompatible with the tasks and nature of the war and lacked a modern helicopter capability.

But the "Britannia" was used very effectively for evacuating about 1,000 people from Aden in 1986. I believe that a new Royal Yacht must have a significant and well-defined wartime role; for example, casualty reception, operating theatre, disaster relief and evacuation. Taxpayers would want to see money spent wisely. At least four serious proposals for a new vessel have been aired, from a sail training ship to a luxury cruise liner. Various consortia claim to be able to raise all the necessary funding. Doubtless a small contribution from the lottery would not go amiss. I understand that an outline specification for a replacement yacht costing in the region of £80 million has been drawn up but awaits government approval. A new vessel is not an £80 million problem but an £80 million asset, a vision for the future. The immense value of the Royal Yacht is demonstrated by her forthcoming and final deployment and plans have been drawn up to send the "Britannia" on an extensive tour of the Far East in a combination of royal visits and trade missions.

That will culminate in a visit to Hong Kong with the Prince of Wales for the hand over of the colony to China next July. I have no doubt that the royal and commercial roles are of vital importance. Both are compatible and give a very good return for one's money. A new national vessel with a clear war-time role should not be just a Royal Yacht but a ship for the nation. I believe that she deserves ministerial support. Now is the time for her to be given a fair wind and I hope a political head of steam is building up for a decision on her replacement. § 10.57 p.m. Lord Monteagle of Brandon My Lord, first, I thank my noble friend Lord Ashbourne for bringing this important topic to your Lordship's notice, and I should like to reiterate what he said. However, I fear that much of what I wanted to say has already been said by other noble Lords. Two and a half years ago, I was lucky enough to be taken on a conducted tour of the "Britannia". It was a most memorable day which I shall never forget.

From then on, I started to take an interest in the future of the yacht, particularly as just before my visit it was announced that she was due to be decommissioned in 1997. It seemed to me that the yacht has such tremendous style and charisma and is such a national asset that it would be a tragedy if she were allowed to disappear without trace. Obviously with a ship of this age, there are a number of disadvantages and problems compared with more modern ships: because of her old-fashioned design, she needs a very large crew; she is not suitable to be used as a hospital ship; and I understand that all the food has to be manhandled up three flights of stairs. Those are just a few of the problems. Therefore, it could be said that she is past her sell-by date and that considerable embarrassment would be caused if, for example, she were to break down or have 1068 a fire at sea. However, one of the options for her future is that it may be possible to refurbish and refit her to present day standards and incorporate modern technology and equipment.

However, the consensus of opinion seems to be that that would be astronomically expensive and that even if that were done, at the end of the day her shelf life would not be very long. Another option is that a new yacht should be built, and there the problems start. First, there is the cost and who should pay for her; what type and size she should be; how her usage could be shared by the Royal Family, business interests, export promotion and a host of others. However, the building of a new yacht would bring tremendous prestige and employment to whatever shipyard was chosen. It is to my mind a very great pity that a certain section of opinion seems to think that the yacht is just a private gin palace of the Royal Family and that it has no other uses. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is used on many occasions to show the flag abroad, and every year there are a number of "sea days", as they are called, where receptions for businessmen are held. On my visit to the yacht we were told that at a reception in Bombay in 1993 orders worth over £1 billion were given to British companies that evening.

It is difficult to quantify exactly how much of that was attributable to "Britannia"; but I venture to suggest that if the reception had been held in a Bombay hotel, the result would not have been nearly so spectacular. What a new yacht may cost—and a figure has already been mentioned of approximately £80 million—pales into insignificance compared with the income that she could generate. Since my visit to the yacht I have kept most of the relevant press cuttings from the Daily Telegraph and the Daily Mail. The majority opinion is that the yacht should be kept in some shape or form. I should also like to quote Mr. Henry Catto, whom my noble friend Lord Ashbourne mentioned. He was host at a state visit by the Queen to America in 1976. During the visit, "Britannia" was also used for commercial purposes. Mr. Catto says: What the British did was, I thought, clever. The great ship was used as a floating promotion for British industry and never was that industry projected in a more glamorous or effective way". Mr. Catto goes on to say: Why on earth would this symbol of Britain be put to rest.

If she is too old and too expensive, for heaven's sake replace her with a 21st century ship, replete with good engineering and good design". A yachtsman serving on "Britannia" wrote in July this year: We have so little to shout about these days, yet we attack the things that are unique to us, in the vain belief that their liquidation will result in hard cash. The total of such losses will always be far greater than any noticeable financial gain". There are numerous other letters and articles expressing the same sentiments; but there are far too many for me to mention here tonight. I have no need to bore your Lordships with examples of waste or unnecessary use of public money and there is frequent evidence of this. I gather that the proposed millennium dome in London is expected to cost in the 1069 region of £360 million—enough to buy four new Britannias with something to spare! I would implore the Government to keep the question of replacing "Britannia" in perspective and make a positive decision without any further delay. § 11.3 p.m.

Viscount Massereene and Ferrard My Lords, I should like, first, to thank my noble friend Lord Ashbourne for initiating tonight's debate. It is now apparent that the current Royal Yacht "Britannia" needs to be replaced. Even if she were refurbished, she would be extremely expensive to run, having been built for a different age. However, it is most important that she has a dignified end—possibly, as a floating museum—but I personally feel that the best solution would be for her to be scrapped. Then there would be no question of her being exploited in the future. Regarding a replacement, some very good ideas have been aired; but there are a number of points which need to be worked out, in particular the role of the Royal Navy in the enterprise especially if there is also to be the possibility of a passenger element. In conclusion, the design of the new yacht should be a mix of the best of the old and the best of the new—plenty of teak, brass and leather with very little plastic and Formica. We do not want her appearance to resemble a giant speedboat as is the case with some of these modern yachts or cruise liners.

I believe that the noble Lord, Lord Amherst of Hackney, mentioned the silhouette of the "Britannia", which is well known, so perhaps her replacement could represent something similar in that respect. § 11.4 p.m. Lord Williams of Elvel My Lords, when Her Majesty goes on official visits I can understand that there is a requirement for a protection from the Ministry of Defence. That is perfectly obvious, but that is a small part of what the Royal Yacht, as I understand it, is about, unless the noble Earl can tell me that I am wrong. Where I have a difficulty is in perceiving this as a MoD matter rather than a DTI matter. I look forward to hearing what the noble Earl has to say. § 11.10 p.m. Earl Howe My Lords, I commend my noble friend Lord Ashbourne for bringing this important issue to the attention of the House. I know that the future of the Royal Yacht is a subject which he follows closely, not least through his membership of the All-Party Parliamentary Royal Yacht Group.

I can assure him that he is joined by a great many others in Parliament and across the country, for barely a week goes by without press interest in the Royal Yacht's past, present and future. § My Lords, before the noble Earl sits down, can he say whether he expects an announcement on the future replacement of "Britannia", if any, to take place before 1st May 1997? Earl Howe My Lords, I should like very much to give an indication to the House as to when a decision might be taken. Unfortunately, I think it would be somewhat rash of me to do so. These are very complex matters, as I indicated, and there are a great many government departments and Ministers looking at this question. While it might be desirable to do so, I can unfortunately give no promises. § House adjourned at twenty-three minutes past eleven o'clock.

Question: What letters preceded the name on the Royal Yacht Britannia
Answer: H.M.Y.